IN - Abigail Williams, 13, & Liberty German, 14, Delphi, 13 Feb 2017 #83

[Ember123]

I think they need a better spokesperson. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that if somebody tips them to the right person the case will be solved. I really am getting annoyed with the way they are handling this case. IMO

Agreed. I DO believe LE are each doing their best but I don't see Carter as a great spokesperson. His wording leaves too much room for misinterpretation. (Hey, that'd be a great WS handle, MissInterp!)
A whole year has gone by. What makes LE think the OneWhoKnowsBG is going to come forward NOW? Are we waiting for someone to fall out of love? Get divorced? Go away to college? Get out of the house with a job of their own? Or does LE just think that this OneWhoKnows hasn't even seen pics and info regarding this case yet? I wonder. Wish they would explain if the sketch is considered a pretty good likeness... or not.

 

[ocgrad]

Thank you for including MSM link, and quotation marks around the words from LE. My own emphasis on this is to boldface-type the "one individual with the strength to say that was my brother," --yes, this is just my opinion at this time, that there is probably a sister, whose brother is jailed for something else. A Dad was mentioned, a cousin, and so on, yet "brother" came first. Another poster, and I don't have that name, said if LE has other evidence, they don't need the word of anyone. And that's the angle that I haven't solved in my mind.

I believe that they need someone to identify him means they do not have much evidence. I think they may strongly suspect someone who looks like the still image but because he has an alibi his resemblance is not enough to collect his DNA. I believe they do have DNA, they said they have enough to convict. But I think they suspect more than one involved so there could be someone who participated but did not leave DNA and that's why they can't eliminate someone.

 

[Try2solve]

http://www.wndu.com/content/news/One-year-later-keeping-the-case-alive-in-Delphi-474006693.html

One year later, keeping the case alive in Delphi

"I don't think there's multiple pieces to the puzzle ladies and gentlemen," said Carter. "I think there's one piece, and it's having one individual with the strength to say that was my brother, or that's my dad, or that's my cousin or that's my neighbor or that's my co-worker. That's all we need."

Call me optimistic but this is from 5/17:
First Sgt. Jerry Holeman: “To call this a cold case is just ridiculous. It’s not even close… It’s like a 5,000-piece puzzle. We have the edge put together, that’s what you do first, you put the corners together and put the edge together – but there’s a lot of missing pieces in the middle.”
From 5,000 pieces to 1, Tick Tock BG!

 

[coffeeandacig]

Agreed. I DO believe LE are each doing their best but I don't see Carter as a great spokesperson. His wording leaves too much room for misinterpretation. (Hey, that'd be a great WS handle, MissInterp!)
A whole year has gone by. What makes LE think the OneWhoKnowsBG is going to come forward NOW? Are we waiting for someone to fall out of love? Get divorced? Go away to college? Get out of the house with a job of their own? Or does LE just think that this OneWhoKnows hasn't even seen pics and info regarding this case yet? I wonder. Wish they would explain if the sketch is considered a pretty good likeness... or not.

Just think out loud about possible scenarios...

I still haven't ruled out Wiechman Pig Company's locations are somehow tied to this case, and the case of Lizzy and Lyric. Just throwing it out that the LE may be calling out to a brother, father, uncle, grandfather or friend who has BG ride in a truck with him on occasion to the pig stations. Maybe BG lost his license or it's suspended. Hence, why he was able to remove the bodies of Lyric and Lizzie 15 miles to the north of where they were abducted, and unable to move the bodies this time.

BG may have suggested on the day of the murder that his "unsuspecting partner" drop him off near the park, giving him the excuse he would eat his lunch there, go for a walk and or grab a nap. BG would then call for him to pick him up when "lunch" or rest break was over.

 

[emptybottles]

Call me optimistic but this is from 5/17:
First Sgt. Jerry Holeman: “To call this a cold case is just ridiculous. It’s not even close… It’s like a 5,000-piece puzzle. We have the edge put together, that’s what you do first, you put the corners together and put the edge together – but there’s a lot of missing pieces in the middle.”
From 5,000 pieces to 1, Tick Tock BG!

Seems to me that proves they have no idea of who it is and are keeping the investigation open solely for PR purposes. At a certain point somebody will need to answer the question of what other easily solved crimes are going cold due to the excessive financial resources and manpower being used for this one.

 

[emptybottles]

I believe that they need someone to identify him means they do not have much evidence. I think they may strongly suspect someone who looks like the still image but because he has an alibi his resemblance is not enough to collect his DNA. I believe they do have DNA, they said they have enough to convict. But I think they suspect more than one involved so there could be someone who participated but did not leave DNA and that's why they can't eliminate someone.

Yup. Spot on analysis.

 

[cluciano63]

In any case not solved right away, they are always “one tip away”. But sometimes that tip never comes.

 

[Hatfield]

(Thanks.)


and also



I agree with this. In fact, one of my few impressions of these murders is that, not only LE, but locals are keeping their mouths shut. To me it is impressive that more has not leaked out as I think that would be the norm.

I interpret this silence as self-control and attribute it to positive good motives and not a negative motive (eg some kind of cover up or something else bad). I attribute the silence to discretion, respect for the girls and their loved ones, the gravity of the matter (2 girls were killed) and not wanting to hinder the investigation in any way.

IMO there HAS to be numerous individuals besides the murderer(s) who know details of the case. Those numerous individuals are not divulging those details. That is very impressive to me and speaks loudly to me of the love and concern the Delphi community has for their own (Libby and Abby's family and friends). My impressions were and are that it has been this way from the start.

If Delphi and state LE have purposefully kept the details on a kind of "need to know" basis, and IMO they have, then I think that's a very smart move on their part because it helps to prevent information leaks and is at least one point in support of the idea that they are handling the investigation wisely and with integrity.

Kudos to LE and kudos to the Delphi community! And may today be the day that brings a breakthrough.

JMO
I think one reason there has not been much "leaking" of information from the locals is some are genuinely afraid. BG has not been caught and LE is not giving a good vibe that someone is going to be arrested anytime soon.

So if you lived locally you sure would not want to bring attention to yourself with BG still on the loose.

I do think he left the area very quickly after the murders but by now there is no telling where he could strike next. I do think its very possible he will strike again. I just hope LE makes an arrest before he kills another person.

 

[Scarlett12]

Re:Leaks

There ARE leaks, locals that want info can find it .

However, those of us that maybe have came across a leak or two can’t put that info here.. thus that’s why you’re not hearing about it.

But, believe me there are what I think are 100% facts about this case floating around.. as well as rumors that are also probably based in facts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kidetect22]

Here is my thought: all we have is a grainy image from a video but we can’t see the video. We get three words from the video- where LE gets to hear and see the whole video. My thought is, they probably have the guy pinpointed but he somehow has a decent alibi... they need that ONE person to blow that alibi to pieces for them! Especially with men, their time frames could be off an hour or two while telling a story or talking about their day and not even realize it (I’m thinking maybe BG does have a brother he works with or was hanging with that day and BG left for a late lunch for an hour) this brother thinks “yes he was at work but didn’t take a lunch etc.” because the lunch was late and he didn’t really think much of it ... idk, just an idea.

 

[Jax49]

For me, it's not about the number of posts, it's about the content. Lately there are new ideas, revisiting old ideas, and some posts with good critical thinking and a willingness to not get stuck on one theory.
JMO

The Thanks button wasn't enough. It has been nice to see the path the thread has taken in the last several days.There has been rehashing of old thoughts but also some interesting new suggestions. Great to see some of the original contributors returning.

bbm

 

[Jethro4WS]

I also have always had a hard time that they would have gone through the creek. If they did I don't think it was part of BG's plan (if there was a plan). I read the transcript of the August Holman interview that Shire mentioned. His statement about them going through the creek was vague and odd. "... I mean, I don't think anybody, say on a walk, would walk that way." Well, that's pretty clear. It just sounded like he was trying not to say for the millionth time that he needed to protect the investigation. I did not get a definitive answer from that whether they believe they did or didn't go through the creek. I have always thought it made sense they were taken in a vehicle since they were right on a well hidden road. But LE said they have no evidence he left the crime scene in a vehicle. Not sure if that is their double speak and it doesn't seem reasonable to think he left the bridge in a vehicle but not the area behind RL's place where their bodies were found.
Then the interviewer said something I had not heard before saying, "...obviously I wasn't even there when you guys found all these horrible things at the crime scene." Was she referring to the 2 girls bodies? I don't want to make light of how horrible it would be even if there were no obvious signs of their COD, but I don't think I would have phrased it that way.
Also I noticed Holman stated he believes there is more than one person involved in their murders. He would not share his theories on whether he is local or transient. In fact he is careful to distinguish between what he believes vs the evidence.
Here is the link.
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/s...Delphi-13-Feb-2017-65&p=13565009#post13565009
I would like to have an update of this interview 6 months later he must know more.
Regarding what they were looking for in the searches and evidence of a separate crime scene I have one thing that I keep turning over in my mind. It is from social media so you may discount it but it was a posting from RL's family who said thank you to the ISP for neatly restacking the hay in the barn (RL's not the Mear' s barn). I took it to be a sincere response to LE who they may have assumed would leave the place in a wreck but in fact left it neater than before. Not sure we can glean anything from that as they could have been looking for a scene and thought the hay was placed to obscure it, or they could have looked for an item they thought may have been tossed behind or between the bales. Or even the hay may have been discovered in disarray and they stacked it neatly.

What was odd about that particular part of the interview with Holman was that even right up to the moment of her beginning to speak about the walk LE, nor the media, made no mention whatsoever about anything related to crime flow. She asks no set up questions to build a foundation for the alleged flow but rather just prattles it off as if it were a well known fact and then Holman dances a bit of a jig. Even so, that particular revelation, if it were true, should have sparked at least some other media interest and questions from other journalists about the crime flow and there is zero. The first and only mention by LE or the media of crossing the creek comes from this reporter.

As for LE saying they didn't have evidence that BG left the area in a vehicle I will also offer an observation that aren't saying BG didn't leave the area in a vehicle just that they don't have evidence of that.

 

[FrostedGlass]

Re:Leaks

There ARE leaks, locals that want info can find it .

However, those of us that maybe have came across a leak or two can’t put that info here.. thus that’s why you’re not hearing about it.

But, believe me there are what I think are 100% facts about this case floating around.. as well as rumors that are also probably based in facts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

From Holeman's interview last summer:

In the part I bolded, he decided to change his wording right in the middle of the sentence. It sounds to me like he was going to say "and there's a lot of people in the area who do know." but decided against it and said: "there is a lot of information out there that is known."

@ 4:15 mm
"Whoever did this is probably the only person who knows some details of this case. A lot of people think they know and there's are a lot of people in the area, there is a lot of information out there that is known but sometimes it's embellished or over-exaggerated and we just talked to the family the other day to try and squash some rumors... (snip) and people guess and sometimes they get close. When they do that, it jeopardizes our investigation and we really frown upon that."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFHQIzJM-yQ

 

[Deleted member 102539]

Thank you for including MSM link, and quotation marks around the words from LE. My own emphasis on this is to boldface-type the "one individual with the strength to say that was my brother," --yes, this is just my opinion at this time, that there is probably a sister, whose brother is jailed for something else. A Dad was mentioned, a cousin, and so on, yet "brother" came first. Another poster, and I don't have that name, said if LE has other evidence, they don't need the word of anyone. And that's the angle that I haven't solved in my mind.

Because Carter is only "thinking" and not "knowing", it might be there is missing more than 1 piece to the puzzle. In any case the DNA seems to not match with someone of a giant database and they (LE) don't dare to arrest a (secret) suspect. They are waiting for 100% certainty knowing they have the right one. And they want to get his accomplice at the same time IF there was someone other, who participated. IMO of course

ETA: Maybe, LE have one perp (in mind) and are now searching for the second?

 

[BIC]

What was odd about that particular part of the interview with Holman was that even right up to the moment of her beginning to speak about the walk LE, nor the media, made no mention whatsoever about anything related to crime flow. She asks no set up questions to build a foundation for the alleged flow but rather just prattles it off as if it were a well known fact and then Holman dances a bit of a jig. Even so, that particular revelation, if it were true, should have sparked at least some other media interest and questions from other journalists about the crime flow and there is zero. The first and only mention by LE or the media of crossing the creek comes from this reporter.

As for LE saying they didn't have evidence that BG left the area in a vehicle I will also offer an observation that aren't saying BG didn't leave the area in a vehicle just that they don't have evidence of that.

I can’t remember the quote, but I do remember that it was pretty clear that he was saying they crossed the creek, that’s probably why there were no follow up questions regarding that point. IMO

 

[heartgoesout]

From Holeman's interview last summer:

In the part I bolded, he decided to change his wording right in the middle of the sentence. It sounds to me like he was going to say "and there's a lot of people in the area who do know." but decided against it and said: "there is a lot of information out there that is known."

@ 4:15 mm
"Whoever did this is probably the only person who knows some details of this case. A lot of people think they know and there's are a lot of people in the area, there is a lot of information out there that is known but sometimes it's embellished or over-exaggerated and we just talked to the family the other day to try and squash some rumors... (snip) and people guess and sometimes they get close. When they do that, it jeopardizes our investigation and we really frown upon that."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFHQIzJM-yQ

Hence, in my opinion, why there was no picture of the sketch, no tip line, etc...at the press conference. They know who BG is and need his false alibi to tell the truth. Meaning they cannot prove within a reasonable doubt to a jury that BG's alibi is false.

In the case of Holly Grim, LE knew all along that her coworker was late to work the day she disappeared and made up some reasonable alibi. They even had his DNA at the abduction scene that he explained away. They were in talks with him from the beginning. The public knew nothing of this. Fast forward 3 years, LE swarms his house and find her body on his property. He is arrested. His wife did noticed his muddy boots the day of the abduction. We dont know what she actually knew at this point. We the public do not know what happened the day he was arrested that LE was finally was able to make the arrest. What changed? What happened after 3 long years of knowing who did it all along? What was that "one missing tip" or piece of info they needed? We are awaiting the trail to hopefully hear more. But my point is LE knew all along and I am hoping that is the case with dear Abby and Libby.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

What was odd about that particular part of the interview with Holman was that even right up to the moment of her beginning to speak about the walk LE, nor the media, made no mention whatsoever about anything related to crime flow. She asks no set up questions to build a foundation for the alleged flow but rather just prattles it off as if it were a well known fact and then Holman dances a bit of a jig. Even so, that particular revelation, if it were true, should have sparked at least some other media interest and questions from other journalists about the crime flow and there is zero. The first and only mention by LE or the media of crossing the creek comes from this reporter.

As for LE saying they didn't have evidence that BG left the area in a vehicle I will also offer an observation that aren't saying BG didn't leave the area in a vehicle just that they don't have evidence of that.

bbm
^^ This maybe!

 

[Jethro4WS]

I can’t remember the quote, but I do remember that it was pretty clear that he was saying they crossed the creek, that’s probably why there were no follow up questions regarding that point. IMO

Quite literally, LE has NEVER said that the creek was crossed. Not once. Not prior to the interview (hence, where did her version of the flow come from?) and not after the interview either. Because it never was mentioned, nor reported about, if it were true then it would be NEWS. It would be a NEW revelation. I have not yet found any other media source, except that interview, that mentions any of the crime flow. It is something rather peculiar about this case.

The media has been extremely compliant, has not done any investigation on their own, reported information from anonymous LE sources, etc. It is rather strange that would be the case considering the amount of press coverage the case received.

 

[BIC]

Quite literally, LE has NEVER said that the creek was crossed. Not once. Not prior to the interview (hence, where did her version of the flow come from?) and not after the interview either. Because it never was mentioned, nor reported about, if it were true then it would be NEWS. It would be a NEW revelation. I have not yet found any other media source, except that interview, that mentions any of the crime flow. It is something rather peculiar about this case.

The media has been extremely compliant, has not done any investigation on their own, reported information from anonymous LE sources, etc. It is rather strange that would be the case considering the amount of press coverage the case received.

That’s your opinion. To me it was clearly stated in the interview. He said something like, To go through that brush, and then to cross the creek. Trying to read too much into it just confuses things even more. IMO

 

[Jax49]

That’s your opinion. To me it was clearly stated in the interview. He said something like, To go through that brush, and then to cross the creek. Trying to read too much into it just confuses things even more. IMO

I just listened to the interview again and agree with you. Sgt. Holeman is the one who mentions crossing the creek and clearly indicates that is the way he believes the girls and BG went. At about the 10 minute mark of the interview if anyone wants to listen.

http://fox59.com/2017/08/14/lead-de...ave-more-audio-from-teens-phone-dna-evidence/

moo

ETA: The reporter didn't ask if they crossed the creek. He volunteered that info.